Wetmore v. Royal
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant, the Pioneer Savings and Loan Company, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, Frederick Hooker, J., made February 23, 1893, denying its motion for a new trial. The plaintiff, Wallace W. Wetmore, furnished materials and did work in constructing a house for defendant David Royal on the North forty eight (48) feet in width of lot five (5) of Cornell’s Out Lots to Minneapolis.
Read the full summary
Appeal by defendant, the Pioneer Savings and Loan Company, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, Frederick Hooker, J., made February 23, 1893, denying its motion for a new trial. The plaintiff, Wallace W. Wetmore, furnished materials and did work in constructing a house for defendant David Royal on the North forty eight (48) feet in width of lot five (5) of Cornell’s Out Lots to Minneapolis. On August 29, 1890, the plaintiff commenced work and delivered the fii'st material on the ground. On March 14, 1891, he made and filed a lien statement, in which by mistake he stated…
1Opinion of the CourtBuck, J.
On the 26th day of August, 1890, one of the defendants, David Royal, was the owner of a lot in the city of Minneapolis, and on that day he entered into a verbal contract with the plaintiff whereby he agreed, for the consideration of $2,700, to furnish material and labor for the erection of a double frame tenement house upon said lot. He performed his part of the agreement, and furnished extra material and labor to the amount of $40. On the 2d day of September, 1890, said verbal contract was reduced to writing, and signed by Wetmore and Royal. On the 29th day of August, 1890, Wetmore commenced…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Trustees of the Freeholders & Commonalty v. SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- State v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Barchent v. SelleckSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903